GAROVORKIN Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 37 minutes ago, Sword of Doom said: Yup. Yup. Police state / fascism here we go. Given all the safeguards our system has , It seems rather doubtful that this will or can happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 8 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said: Given all the safeguards our system has , It seems rather doubtful that this will or can happen. I'm sure that is very comforting to all the people who will suffer at the hands of the police in the meantime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnot OG Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 12 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said: Given all the safeguards our system has , It seems rather doubtful that this will or can happen. What safeguards? The republicans control every major branch of the government at the moment. They aren't saving anything and so far have let this asshole run wild. You're pushing the it can't happen here narrative. It can't happen anywhere until it does. It can happen here and it will happen here thanks to a republican party that has zero spine and no ethics. They're letting Trump do what he wants and there are no repercussions. Just some finger wagging here and there, some tweets reinforcing that, but they still let him do what he wants and vote in favor of who he puts forth for positions because their policy is what he is saying, he's just a blunt and overt version of what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukle Posted August 28, 2017 Author Share Posted August 28, 2017 24 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said: Given all the safeguards our system has , It seems rather doubtful that this will or can happen. Unless it is challenged in the Supreme Court, it seems that the 1886 decision that the President's power to pardon is completely unlimited will remain in force. Consider that Trump's pardon was issued after a Sheriff defied the 5th Amendment (and, I suppose, the 9th, depending on your view), but his pardon overrode this breach of the Bill of Rights. Therefore, a police state is the current transition. Trump actively encourages violence at his rallies, spoke in front of the police and told them to be rough with suspects. And he has just pardoned a Sheriff who broke the 5th Amendment. His pattern of behaviour is consistent with a transition to police state. As to whether it will materialise depends on his party's willingness to reel him in, the Department of Justice's co-operation or otherwise and the police's willingness to follow through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 10 hours ago, OldGimletEye said: I think there is little doubt that reforms on the supply side of the health care market will have to be made. That includes doctors, insurance companies, and big pharma. But, if you’re not willing to do that, it would seem, you might as well give up the whole idea of universal healthcare. And do liberals want to give that up? I don’t think they do. So it’s a fight worth having. This is ignoring the question of what your goals are, how achievable what parts of them are and when you even wanna take those fights. Universal health care =/= single payer. There are many other options undertaken by different countries around the world. Obamacare, for all it's flaws, did a lot of good and nobody gave up on anything getting it passed. They just took what they could get at the time. There's plenty that can be done in the short term too and plenty of other possible systems you could move the US towards. The public option and medicare buy-in and medicare expansion are obvious examples of fairly large reforms that can bring costs down and are easier to pass. I mean, Obamacare was far from what many people on the Left wanted but unlike every previous attempt, it actually passed so it's actually helping people, it's proven durable and it still absolutely cost the Democrats a ton of power in the federal government and has led to a ton of issues because of GOP control of Congress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 14 minutes ago, Yukle said: Unless it is challenged in the Supreme Court, it seems that the 1886 decision that the President's power to pardon is completely unlimited will remain in force. Consider that Trump's pardon was issued after a Sheriff defied the 5th Amendment (and, I suppose, the 9th, depending on your view), but his pardon overrode this breach of the Bill of Rights. Therefore, a police state is the current transition. The president's power to pardon is going to have little to do with whether or not the Trump administration constructs a true police state. Is pardoning "Sheriff Joe" abhorrent? Yep. But go through the history of presidential pardons. There's plenty of abhorrence to go around. Trump is going to need far more political tools and capital than simply pardoning infamously draconian law enforcement officials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAROVORKIN Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 14 minutes ago, larrytheimp said: I'm sure that is very comforting to all the people who will suffer at the hands of the police in the meantime. 10 minutes ago, Sword of Doom said: What safeguards? The republicans control every major branch of the government at the moment. They aren't saving anything and so far have let this asshole run wild. You're pushing the it can't happen here narrative. It can't happen anywhere until it does. It can happen here and it will happen here thanks to a republican party that has zero spine and no ethics. They're letting Trump do what he wants and there are no repercussions. Just some finger wagging here and there, some tweets reinforcing that, but they still let him do what he wants and vote in favor of who he puts forth for positions because their policy is what he is saying, he's just a blunt and overt version of what they want. 7 minutes ago, Yukle said: Unless it is challenged in the Supreme Court, it seems that the 1886 decision that the President's power to pardon is completely unlimited. Consider that Trump's pardon was issued after a Sheriff defied the 5th Amendment (and, I suppose, the 9th, depending on your view), but his pardon overrode this breach of the Bill of Rights. Therefore, a police state is the current transition. Trump actively encourages violence at his rallies, spoke in front of the police and told them to be rough with suspects. And he has just pardoned a Sheriff who broke the 5th Amendment. His pattern of behaviour is consistent with a transition to police state. As to whether it will materialise depends on his party's willingness to reel him in, the Department of Justice's co-operation or otherwise and the police's willingness to follow through. No disrespect to all three of you. , but just because you think you see pattern doesn't by necessity mean there really is one . This county is never. becoming a dictatorship . There are lots of safeguards and constitutional check and balances. that would prevent this The Courts even though they are dominated by conservatives would not allow this to happen, The Republican Senate wouldn't stand for its , nor would the Congress . Republican and Democrat together would oppose nor the military or the 300 plus million people in the country . There are limits tp what the President can do on his own . In the end he as to follow the limits of power prescribed by the Constitution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry of the Lawn Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 12 minutes ago, GAROVORKIN said: No disrespect to all three of you. , but just because you think you see pattern doesn't by necessity mean there really is one . This county is never. becoming a dictatorship . There are lots of safeguards and constitutional check and balances. that would prevent this The Courts even though they are dominated by conservatives would not allow this to happen, The Republican Senate wouldn't stand for its , nor would the Congress . Republican and Democrat together would oppose nor the military or the 300 plus million people in the country . There are limits tp what the President can do on his own . In the end he as to follow the limits of power prescribed by the Constitution. Well the power of the presidency has been ever expanding in US history, if you haven't noticed. I mean at least try to make the naive/Pollyanna argument from a place of humor, for example: "right, the only thing keeping Trump from a full-on dictatorship is the plucky stalwarts at the National Park Service" Checks and balances don't mean shit if they aren't enforced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 6 minutes ago, larrytheimp said: Checks and balances don't mean shit if they aren't enforced. Especially since Trump could fire a bunch of the them >>cough Sessions cough<< for example. Plus, he hasn't hired a full gov't staff and appointments in addition to what larrytheimp said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 What does this current ban entail? Near as I can tell, most large metropolitan police forces already use military gear. Many SWAT teams utilize armored vehicles, automatic weapons, bomb robots, military grade body armor, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 6 minutes ago, larrytheimp said: "right, the only thing keeping Trump from a full-on dictatorship is the plucky stalwarts at the National Park Service" Quote President Bartlet: You're talking to a former governor. I was commander-in-chief of the New Hampshire National Guard. Morris Tolliver: You guys get into a lot of tough scrapes, did ya? President Bartlet: We didn't have to. We'd just stand on the border and stare you down. Then we'd all go for pancakes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAROVORKIN Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 22 minutes ago, larrytheimp said: Well the power of the presidency has been ever expanding in US history, if you haven't noticed. I mean at least try to make the naive/Pollyanna argument from a place of humor, for example: "right, the only thing keeping Trump from a full-on dictatorship is the plucky stalwarts at the National Park Service" Checks and balances don't mean shit if they aren't enforced. The Pollyanna thing is crap. Years from now , your going wonder why you wasted all this time and energy worrying about this in the first place. It's not happening , ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: What does this current ban entail? Near as I can tell, most large metropolitan police forces already use military gear. Many SWAT teams utilize armored vehicles, automatic weapons, bomb robots, military grade body armor, etc. He's basically rescinding an Obama executive order: Quote The new plan, outlined in documents obtained by USA TODAY, would roll back an Obama administration executive order that blocked armored vehicles, large-caliber weapons, ammunition and other heavy equipment from being re-purposed from foreign battlefields to America's streets. Frankly, I'm surprised it took him this long. Probably because his staff is so incompetent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martell Spy Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 Major Ku Klux Klan and Nazi Website Stormfront Has Been Kicked Offline http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2017/08/27/stormfront_has_been_kicked_offline.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnot OG Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 1 hour ago, GAROVORKIN said: No disrespect to all three of you. , but just because you think you see pattern doesn't by necessity mean there really is one . This county is never. becoming a dictatorship . There are lots of safeguards and constitutional check and balances. that would prevent this The Courts even though they are dominated by conservatives would not allow this to happen, The Republican Senate wouldn't stand for its , nor would the Congress . Republican and Democrat together would oppose nor the military or the 300 plus million people in the country . There are limits tp what the President can do on his own . In the end he as to follow the limits of power prescribed by the Constitution. God you are naive. You're literally the meme of the dog in a house burning down saying everything is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 2 hours ago, GAROVORKIN said: Given all the safeguards our system has , It seems rather doubtful that this will or can happen. There is literally nothing that can stop this short of impeachment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 1 hour ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: What does this current ban entail? Near as I can tell, most large metropolitan police forces already use military gear. Many SWAT teams utilize armored vehicles, automatic weapons, bomb robots, military grade body armor, etc. That had been banned. That ban is being removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 16 minutes ago, Kalbear said: That had been banned. That ban is being removed. So the Obama executive order prevented them from adding more? Cause they use that stuff all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 20 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: So the Obama executive order prevented them from adding more? Cause they use that stuff all the time. Not exactly. Here's the original order. And here's Obama's determination based on the recommendations of the "working group" created by the order: Quote In doing so, Obama put his stamp on the recommendations of a multi-agency federal working group that endorsed a ban on sales of some military equipment and providing more training, supervision and oversight of others. "We've seen how militarized gear can sometimes give people a feeling like they're an occupying force, as opposed to a force that's part of the community that's protecting them and serving them," Obama said in a speech in Camden, N.J. Monday. He said military equipment can "alienate and intimidate local residents and may send the wrong message." ... Banned will be tracked armored vehicles, bayonets, grenade launchers, camouflage uniforms, and large-caliber weapons and ammunition. "So we're going to prohibit some equipment made for the battlefield that is not appropriate for local police departments," Obama said. "There's other equipment that may be needed in certain cases, but only with proper training." That equipment will be placed on a "controlled equipment list" that includes aircraft, wheeled tactical vehicles, mobile command-and-control units, battering rams and riot gear. To have access to that equipment, police departments must meet national policing standards, track their use and receive approval from the federal government before selling or transferring them. ETA: Note this ban is on the sale of such equipment from the feds to "LEAs," not on any non-federal LEAs using such that they already possess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 7 minutes ago, dmc515 said: Not exactly. Here's the original order. And here's Obama's determination based on the recommendations of the "working group" created by the order: ETA: Note this ban is on the sale of such equipment from the feds to "LEAs," not on any non-federal LEAs using such that they already possess. Ah, okay. That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.